vpn-mcp

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It successfully reveals behavioral traits: 'Stops the local proxy' and 'WebFetch returns to direct connection' explain the network stack changes. However, it omits details about connection cleanup, timeout behavior, or state persistence.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three short sentences with zero waste. Front-loaded with the primary action 'Disconnect from VPN', followed by mechanism 'Stops the local proxy', and effect 'WebFetch returns to direct connection'. Every clause earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a zero-parameter disconnect tool with no output schema, the description is sufficiently complete. It covers the action, mechanism, and network effects. Missing only minor details like whether active connections are force-terminated or state cleanup behavior.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool has zero parameters, triggering the baseline score of 4 per the rules. No parameter documentation is required, and the description appropriately focuses on behavioral effects rather than non-existent inputs.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses specific verbs ('Disconnect', 'Stops', 'returns') with clear resources ('VPN', 'local proxy', 'WebFetch/direct connection'). It clearly distinguishes from siblings like vpn_connect and vpn_switch by explicitly stating the termination action.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage through stating the effects (disconnecting, stopping proxy), but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this versus alternatives like vpn_switch or vpn_activate. No 'when-not' or alternative recommendations are provided.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.